Psycholinguistic: Linguistics and Language Essay

This landing field seeks to determine the relevance of the behavioristic and cognitive approaches for Saudi learners eruditeness of incline as a impertinent countersig records (EFL). A special assist is given to learners in EFL programs at the University level. It also assesses the effectiveness of these approaches on learner in shift program as well. One contention is that time behaviorist-inspired geomorphologicalist methodologies argon best applicable at the prep ar outning levels, transformationalist/cognitivist approach contri only whenes try methodologies to enhance the learners written and spoken skills in advanced stages.Advances in interpreting drop be achieved by a prove of the branch of translation with an emphasis on a deductive rather than an inductive approach. mental institution Foreign oral communicating t each(prenominal)ers yield long been perplexed by a continuum of abundant psycho- lingual theories. One approach is the traditional method to sustain/foreign row instruct and culture. This embodied the grammar translation method which sprouted at the end of the eighteenth century in Germany and spread byout europium (Howat, 1984).The second approach is the direct method that developed in the belated nineteenth century as a reaction against the grammar-translation method (R. Carter, 1993). foregoing to the time of Chomsky, little was known slightlywhat the process of second spoken wrangle acquisition, and thitherof (traditional approaches) were grounded in the linguistic, psychological, and pedagogicalal theories of their day. (1) The author has conducted literature search through Educational Resources Index (Eric) was well as run-ins Association (MLA) and Psychological.Abstracts (Psyclit). It has been noniced that virtually consummation, mostly dissertation, have dealt with the Saudi acquisition of specific linguistic features of L2, often(prenominal) as Morpheme acquisition Order (Al-Afaleg, 1991), Tem poral Conjunctions (Noor, 1991), English derivational geomorphology (Al-Qadi 1992) Tense and Aspect (Farraj, 1995) and certify style Relative Clauses (Maghrabi, 1997), and Studies on the psycho-linguistic theories of verbiage acquisition, specifically in relation to the Saudi learner of English do not seem to exist.thither be four major theories of oral communication acquisition and phrase learning which many psycholinguists and applied linguistics are familiar withBehaviorism, neo-behavioristic psychology, cognitivism, and humanism. The purpose of this article is to examine two of these theories Behaviorism (which is link to morphologicism) and cognitivism (which is related to transformationalism) and then show the extent to which these two theories relate to vocabulary communication learning and contingently to Saudi learners enrolled in EFL and translation programs in superpower Saud University. STRUCTURAL (BEHAVIORISTIC) VIEWThe psychological hypothesis behind behaviorist linguistics was founded by J. B. Watson (1942). (2) The extreme behavioristic meet-point is characterized by B. F. Skinners long-familiar study, Verbal Behavior (1957) which presents a theory of language learning regular(a) more firmly planted in the court of Pavlovian carnal behavior than the language theories of the Russian behaviorist school which was itself greatly influenced by the work of Pavlov. The work that could be regarded as the basic doctrine of the morphological school of linguistic theory was Leonard Bloomfields Language (1933).In this work, Bloomfield argued that the study of language could be pursued without reference to psychological doctrines and he excessivelyk a firmly behavioristic line aimed at scientific objectivity. Bloomfield did not turn down the role of substance in language, but he objected to its importance in the study of language at a time when human familiarity of the vast range of semantic association bandageed to every linguis tic form was so very little. Moreover, he viewed semantics as a curb element to the primary stimulus reply dealingship of communicatory behavior.To Bloomfieldians language is nothing but a habit that the kidskin comes to learn by imitation. In their account of language acquisition, the child is exposed to linguistic data which he/she innateizes and then re flummoxs at a later stage. Language is thus learned from outside, we learn it in the same government agency that we learn other habits. Learning a language is not very ofttimes polar from the laboratory mouse learning to expect to be fed each time aroundone rings a bell. (3) They desire that, a scientific theory must reject all data that are not directly observable or physically measurable.(4). To the behaviorists, habit formation is brought about through repetition, mimicry, and memorisation. Thus no clear distinction seems to be do amongst learning the front language and the target language. To them linguistic h abits, world(a)ity and associations have to be ingeminate using different data. Skinner (1957) base his whole theory of language acquisition and speech realization on the recognizable external forms of what Chomsky terms input and output and makes no border for any internal process of the organism.Stimulus and reinforcement (or reward) from the input and the verbal operant (or response) forms the output. The structuralists, whose views are related to behavioral psychology, see language as a finite list of ordered elements to which one can attach labels. They undertake a systematic synopsis of social system. The teacher depends on such(prenominal) structural description as the distribution and combination of elements into a range of speech. It is based on the process of substitution, the replacement of one unit by another unit of the same grammatical class. They follow a taxonomical approach in teaching.Their view is characterized by the insistence that language is learnt b y the strength of habitual association and by the con school text generalization (i. e. general association). It is more of an inductive rather than a deductive system. The Swiss educatee Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913), who is an associationist, believes that all language items are essentially interlinked. (5) He argues that language was similar a game of chess, a system in which each item is defined by its relationship to all the otherslanguage is a carefully built structure of interwoven elements.(6) TRANSFORMATIONAL (COGNITIVE) VIEW The transformational (cognitive) theories, represented by Noam Chomsky have been acknowledged by linguists as a revolutionary theatrical role to linguistics, though Chomsky himself related his views to those of Hambolt and to rationalist philosophers of the Seventeenth Century such as Descartes. The school of thinking, which has developed around Chomskys ideas, has been variously termed Cognitive, mentalist, reproductive and transformationalis t.His Transformational Analysis (1955), syntactic Structures (1957), Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (1965), and Language and Mind (1968) are regarded as particular pioneer works of the new approach. The cognitivists reject the views of the behaviorists. They believe that everybody learns a language, not because they are subjected to a similar conditioning process, but because they possess an inborn competency which permits them to bring out a language as a normal festeringal process.This capacity is by definition ordinarythe nature of language is such that it is impossible to explain it without postulating an innate appliance of a fairly well-defined kind. (7) They look for a oecumenical grammar that contains universals relating to the established regularities characterizing all languages. For instance, subject and predicate, negative and adjectival forms are present in all languages because they are a universal feature, whereas the structuring and arrangement of these feat ures belong to private languages.The deeply structure rules are limited by the grammar of each particular language. Universal grammar, according to Chomsky is a theory of the initial state of the language faculty, prior to any linguistic experience. (8) To the cognitivist, children are born with an innate capacity for language development. The human brain is ready for language, in the sense that when children are exposed to speech, certain general principles for discovering or structuring language automatically begin to operate.These principles constitute, what Chomsky terms, a child language acquisition braid (LAD). A child uses its LAD to make sense of utterances heard around it, derived from his primary linguistic data hypotheses about the grammar of the language-what the sentences are, and how they are constructed. This knowledge is then used to publish sentences that, after a process of trial and error, correspond to those in full-grown speech the child has learned a set o f generalizations of rules, governing the way in which sentences are formed.(9) Chomsky emphasizes the linguistic creativity, that is .. the ability of human beings to produce and comprehend an infinite number of novel sentences. (10) Basic to this reason, Comsky believes that Bloomfieldian linguistics was too ambitious in that it was unrealistic to expect to be able to lay down foolproof rules for extracting a perfect description of a language from a mass of data.It was too limited because it concentrated on describing sets of utterances which happened to have been spoken. (11) Whilst the structuralist lays emphasis on the shape up structure (patternsetc.), the transformationalist lays emphasis on the processes of the deep structure the stress is on learning to learn the development of a strategy of learning rather than the accumulation of information and rules.The structuralist tends to overemphasize the surface forms and the development of rules and to neglect the meaning. Unlik e the behaviorists who believe that if there is a response there must be stimulus, the transformationalists (cognitivists) argue that language acquisition is self-induced and that the environment serves merely to trigger off a maturation process.Language comes primarily though the maturation that the environment triggers off and not through the environment itself. Erric Lenneberg, who is a cognitivist, also suggests that training is not necessary and that maturation is enough. His critical period hypothesis (1967) holds that language acquisition must number before the onset of puberty in order for language to develop fully. (12) DISCUSSION establish on the contradictory views of the two schools, a outline discussion of how these views may relate to second language learning and teaching forget be presented.This allow for be followed by a intromission (explanation) of the extent to which these views can apply to the case of the Saudi learner of English at the university level. From the preceding background, structuralism (behaviorism) seems to attribute the function of language to control and experience. A process of habit formation is brought about through repetition, mimicry, and memorization. There is a little difference between learning a showtime language and a target language. Linguistic habits, generalizations, and associations have to be repeated using different data.Cognitivism, on the other hand proposes that the processes of second language acquisition are not identical to those of the first language acquisition although there are similarities. One of the similarities could be that L2 may need to be learned at the same time as L1. Neverthe slight, considering the question of universal and maturation, since acquisition of an L2 requires conscious control of learning and this cannot be handled at an other(a) stage, transformationlists (cognitivists) hold that consciously controlled learning should be left to a much later stage, though there is no conclusive evidence to run on this view.At this stage of analysis, it can be argued that, first, innate factors are less important for L2 learning than social factors of environment, motivation, and reinforcement. Second, a transformational system can possibly operate with native speakers of a language, but although it is too complicated and may be confusing to be applied in second language/foreign language teaching, certain aspects may be useful. For instance, identification of tenderness sentences which are similar in different languages, could be economical. Transformation could work from the comparison of these kernel sentences.Third, due to pilfer characteristics of virtually of the cognitive views, the structural acquisition technique is probably more practical for formal learning in the first stages of the second language, and the cognitive technique may acquit greater importance in the more advanced stages. Fourth, while nearly credence should be given to Chomskys language acquisition device (LAD), which explains why children invent new terms that mean nothing to adults, its limitations turn over real when dealing with adults learning a second language.That is when linguistic hindrance causes serious obstacles to second/foreign language learners. In such function LAD will not be useful. Fifth, a structuralist method closely linked to Skinners stimulus-response-reinforcement theory of verbal behavior is the audiolingual approach which advocates the formation of the speech habits. Its feasible use can be realized through J. B. Carrols (1966) following basic terms such as a) Speech is primary, make-up secondary, so the habits that are formed in language must be speech habits.b) automatic pistol response is best achieved by constant repetition. c) Automatic response is best achieved by constant repetition. Offshoots of this theory are the language laboratory, structural drill, imitation, and memorization techniques. (13) Finally, cognitive theory advocates the development in the student of a conscious control of the psychological, grammatical, and lexical patterns of a given second language. This can be achieved through study and analysis of these patterns so that readiness in using language stems from the teachers understanding of its structure.The structural approach (as it employs behavioristic direction) has remained useful in the teaching of English as a foreign language, most importantly to help the learner acquire good language basis. For Saudi EFL learners, the use of drills at the phonetic level is of great help especially when dealing with segmental items that cause every interlingual or intralingual errors. A Saudi learner not only split up to produce the voiceless stop /p/ and the voiced fricative /v/ but tends to replace them with his L1 segments /b/ and /f/ respectively.Similarly, the velar nasal / / as a phoneme occurring at the final position of a word like sing, long which causes just about diffic ulties for the Saudi EFL learner where he replaces it with the term of the two phonetic segments /n/ and /g/, and the alveo-palatal affricate /c/, occurring in words like children and speech where, instead, he transfers his Arabic alveo-palatal fricative /s/. Emphasis on drills will also alter the learner to concentrate a possible interference of the Arabic syllable structure CVCV into the English structure.Since some Saudis tend to pronounce English words like against as *againist, and first as *firist. Structural (behavioristic) teacher can help in figure out other problematic linguistic features such as agreement and word order which Saudi EFL learner encounter. Thus, patterns and exercises are needed to reduce unreasonable forms such as *He play, they buyed, talls buildings, and hypercorrections such as * He cans, and She musts.The transformational cognitive orientation can be effective in the advanced stages of a foreign language acquisition. Thus, for Saudi students at th e university higher levels, where advanced courses on linguistics and translation are offered, it is logical to assume that structural drills, repetitions, and memorization techniques will no longer be essential. At this level of development in the intimate knowledge of language and culture we may deliberate a minimal level of interference from the native tongue (Arabic) of the learners.Yet, such aspects of the target language as deep structure and transformational rules will enable the Saudi learner to understand some of the idiosyncratic forms and ambiguous sentences. Transformational rules will reinforce the learners awareness of the syntactic and the semantic relations between various English linguistic patterns. Through these linguistic relations, learners can make inferences and develop some generalizations about the structure of English language. talk strategies, conversation, and creative essay writing using cultural content will be more beneficial at these levels.With re gard to the translation program, the analysis of source language texts that translators have to translate and the analysis of texts they have to create, a process of linking aspects from cognitivism with that of behaviorism should be observed. Negotiating the meaning of the source language text is not just a sociolinguistic matter it is psycholinguistic as well. Saudi trainees in our translation program happened to have rendered the meaning of They are into the habit of splitting straws based on knowledge acquired through some behavioristic approach and produced a literal erroneous translation outcome.This means that there is always much room for the smaller scale experiment on the factors affecting the text conversion process. The transformation of a text originally in one language into an equivalent text in a different language demands that the content of the message and the formal features and in operation(p) roles of the original text should be retained. In this regard the Saud i trainees translated the verb laid in They laid him open to blackmail without any reference to a likely secondary meaning that the verb lay might imply.This approach supports the notion that much of our experience of the external world of the senses and of the inner world of the wit is mediated by language and by the concepts stored in our memories. These factors refer to entities via the gathering of language and do so variably depending on the medium of communication (language used). It is the process that creates the translation outcome and it is only by understanding that process that we can hope to help our Saudi trainees to improve their linguistic skills.Having state that, it is difficult to see how translation theories can move beyond the inseparable and the normative evaluation of texts without drawing heavily on aspects from both behaviorism an cognitivism. Translation theories have made little systematic use of the techniques and insights of contemporary linguistics . With this fact in mind, Saudi translation trainees should be trained in spite of appearance a framework that combines features from all branches of cognitivism and behaviorism.This entails developing in thetrainees performance and competency a familiarity with and a competence in the use of the psychological and psycholinguistic models of memory and information processing on the one hand, and linguistic models of meaning, including meaning beyond the sentence on the other. Logic of the examples provided above asserts the validity of some aspects of the two psycholinguistic views.Cognitive approach may operate with some specific semantic and pragmatic aspects of L2 by means of exploring features as cohesion, abstract and connotative meanings, speech acts and kinetics. Such features should, at this stage, receive due consideration. oddment From the above analysis proceeds that with regard to language acquisition, behavioristic theory can provide much useful information concerning verbal responses and reinforcement. provided it is inadequate to account for innate and cognitive features. Transformational theory, on the other hand, provides much useful information on the basic nature of the organism and its internal processes, but makes little or no account of stimulus-response-reinforcement relationships. Unlike the cognitive approach, behavioral approach tends to manipulate the language and disregard the content.Despite the pedagogic significance of both theories, it seems that none of their approaches is complete in itself. For one reason, the nature of the Arabic language has significantly different phonetic and grammatical structure from that of the English language. Due to this difference and as advocated by Smith (1987) there are far fewer areas of facilitation, and far greater areas of interference (14) The side of the Saudi EFL learners at the university level requires an eclectic approach with combined aspects derived from the approaches state ear lier. This approach can guarantee more effective outcome at the pedagogical level.I believe the attitude, the age, and the aptitude of the learners are three factors that should be considered in second language acquisition. A combination of innate propensities and fair game necessity create the most favorable attitude. All these factors, including the teaching strategies, stand for fundamental variables in learning a foreign language. Relationship between communicative exchanges and syntactic forms alert the translator to the mechanisms that link the highly abstract and universal proposition with the totally physical and context-dependent utterance or text.REFERENCES(1) Pica, T. P. communicatory Language statement An aid to second language acquisition? close to insights from classroom research. English Quarterly, Vol. 21, No. 2, 1988. , (p. 70) (2) Malmkjaer K. (Ed. ) The linguistics Encyclopedia, Routledge, Longon, 1991. , (p. 53) (3) Kebbe, Z. M. , Lectures in general Linguis tics, An former Course, Arabic Academic Press, Aleppo, 1995. , (p. 14) (4) Op. cit,(P. 53) (5) Aitchison, J. , Linguistics, Hodder Headline, London, 1992. , (p. 24) (6) Ibid. (p. 24) (7) Wilkins, D. A. , Linguistics in Language Teaching, Edward Arnold, London, 1974., (p. 168-169) (8) Slakie, R. , The Chomsky Update, Linguistics and Politics, Unwin Hyman, Ltd, London 1990. , (p. 19) (9) Crystal,. D. , The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Cambridge University Press 1987. (p. 234) (10) Op. cit. (p. 26) (11) Ibid. , (p. 26) (12) Brown, H. D. and Gonzo, S. , Readings on Second Language Acquisition, Prentice Hall. , p. 77, 1995. (13) Carrol, J. B. , The contribution of Psychological Theory and Educational Research to the Teaching of Foreign Language, in Trends in Language Teaching, Ed. , Valdmen, 1966. (14) Swan, M. and Smith, B. (Ed.)Learner English, Ateachers guide to interference and other problems, Cambridge University Press, 1987. , (p. 147) (15) Bloomfield, L. 1933 Language. London Allen & Unwin. (16) Chomsky, N. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press, 1965. (17) Chomsky, No. Syntactic Structures. The Hague Mouton, 1957. Afaleg, O. A Comparison of Morpheme Acquisition Order in Learners of English as a Foreign Language versus English as a Second Language The Case of Adult Learners in Saudia. Diss. Indiana Univesity, Bloomington, 1991. (18) Qadi, N. S. , Acquistion of English Derivational Morphology by Arab Speakers, Diss.University of Georgia, Athens, 1991. (19) Farraj. , A. M. Acquistion of Tense and Aspect in the English Based Inter-Language of Non-native Speakers, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1995. (20) Noor, Hashim, The Acquisition of temporal Conjunctions by Saudi Arabian Learners of English, International Journal of Applied Linguistics, Vol. 3, N. 1 (p. 101-2A), 1993. (21) Maghrabi, A. The Roles of psycholinguistic Constraints and Typological Influence in the Acquisition of Pronominal Copies in Relativization by Ar abic and English Learners, Thesis, Georgetown University, Washington, D. C. , 1997.